UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK penne eee eee neannnentuntanneenae XK AKF INC. D/B/A FUNDKITE, : : 24 Civ. 7701 (PAE) Petitioner, : : ORDER -v- : MAZZONI CENTER D/B/A MAZZONI : CENTER/MAZZONI CENTER OUR HEALTH. OUR : LIVES. OUR COMMUNITY, RACHELLE DENISE : TRITINGER, 1334-48 BAINBRIDGE STREET LLC, : and MAZZONI CENTER D/B/A MAZZONI CENTER- X WASHINGTON WEST, Respondents.

PAUL A. ENGELMAYER, District Judge: On October 10, 2024, respondents Mazzoni Center and 1334-48 Bainbridge Street, LLC filed a notice of removal in this case, asserting diversity of citizenship of the parties as the sole basis for federal jurisdiction. Dkt. 1 at 2-4, The citizenship of an LLC is the citizenship of each of its constituent members. While the notice of removal states that 1334-48 Bainbridge Street, LLC is “located in” Pennsylvania, neither the notice of removal nor the complaint appended to the notice indicate the citizenship of the LLC’s members. Dkt. 1 at 2; see Dkt 1-1 at 4-5. The complaint alleges that Mazzoni Center is a corporation organized under the laws of Pennsylvania. /d. at 4. To enable the Court to determine whether there is diversity of citizenship, the removing respondents must submit to the Court within 5 days following the date of this order a letter, filed on ECF, providing the following information:

(1) the citizenship of all petitioners and ali named respondents; (2) the citizenship of natural persons who are members of the LLC; (3) the place of incorporation and principal place of business of any corporate entities who are members of the LLC; (4) Whether all respondents who had been served at the time of removal joined in the notice of removal; and (5) Whether the notice of removal was dated more than 30 days after the first respondent was served. See Handelsman v. Bedford Village Assoc.,

, 51-52 (2d Cir. 2000) (citing Cosgrove v. Bartolotta,

(7th Cir. 1998)); Strother v. Harte,

(S.D.N.Y. 2001) (“For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, a limited liability company has the citizenship of each of its members.”); Curley v. Brignoli, Curley & Roberts Assocs.,

, 83 (2d Cir. 1990) (“[S]ubject matter jurisdiction is an unwaivable sine qua non for the exercise of federal judicial power.”). SO ORDERED. “ad uf / En pe l we Paul A.Engelmayer / United States District Judge

Dated: October 11, 2024 New York, New York